Difference between revisions of "Third Meditation Latin English Heffernan"

Third Meditation Latin/English translated by George Heffernan[edit]

MEDITATIO III. De Deo, qudd existat.

[1.] Claudam nunc oculos, aures obturabo, avocabo omnes sensus, imagines etiam rerum corporalium omnes vel ex cogitatione mea delebo, vel certe, quia hoc fieri vix potest, illas ut inanes & falsas nihili pendam, meque solum alloquendo & penitius inspiciendo, meipsum paulatim mihi magis notum & familiarem reddere conabor. Ego sum res cogitans, id est dubitans, affirmans, negans, pauca intelligens, multa ignorans, volens, nolens, imaginans etiam & sentiens; ut enim ante animadverti, quamvis illa quae sentio vel imaginor extra me fortasse nihil sint, illos tamen cogitandi modos, quos sensus & imaginationes [35] appello, quatenus cogitandi quidam modi tantiim sunt, in me esse sum certus. [GT: "yet those ways of thinking, which I call senses and imaginations, inasmuch as they are only certain ways of thinking, I am certain that they exist in me."]

[2.] Atque his paucis omnia recensui quae vere scio, vel saltem quae me scire hactenus animadverti. Nunc circumspiciam diligentiūs a forte adhuc apud me alia sint ad quae nondum respexi. Sum certus me esse rem cogitafitem. Nunquid ergo etiam scio quid requiratur ut de aliqufi re sim certus? Nempe in hac prima cognitione nihil aliud est, quam clara quaedam & distincta perceptio ejus quod affirmo; quae sane non sufficeret ad me certum de rei veritate reddendum, si posset unquam con-tingere, ut aliquid, quod ita clare & distincte perciperem,

118

MEDITATION III: Concerning God, that he exists.

[1.] Now I shall close my eyes. I shall stop up my ears. I shall call away all my senses. I shall also delete all the images of corporeal things from my cogitation — or rather shall I, because this can hardly be done, certainly regard these images, as empty and false, as being nothing— , and by conversing with and more penetratingly inspecting me alone I shall attempt to render me myself gradually more known and familiar to me. I am a cogitating thing, that is, a thing doubting, affirming, denying, understanding a few things, being ignorant of many things, willing, not willing, as well as imagining and sensing. [Idea₁] For as I have noticed before, although those things which I sense or imagine would perhaps be nothing outside me, I am still certain that those modes of cogitating [GT: "ways of thinking"] which I call "sensations" and "imaginations," in so far as they are only certain modes of cogitating, are in me.

[2.] And with these few words I have reviewed all the things that I truly know, or at least all the things that I have hitherto noticed that I know. Now I will look around more diligently to see whether there might perhaps be still other things within me at which I have not yet looked. I am certain that I am a cogitating thing. Do I therefore also now know what would be required in order that I might be certain of anything? In this primary cognition there is, namely, nothing other than a certain clear and distinct perception of that which I affirm: which would indeed not suffice to render me certain of the truth of the matter if it could ever happen that something that I did so clearly and distinctly perceive were false. And so I now seem

119

[2.] falsum esset; ac proinde jam videor pro regura generali posse statuere, illud omne esse verum, quod valde clare & distincte percipio.

[3.] Verumtamen multa prius ut omnino certa & manifesta admisi, quae tamen postea dubia esse deprehendi. Qualia ergo ista fuere? Nempe terra, coelum, sydera & caetera omnia quae sensibus usurpabam. Quid autem de illis clare percipiebam? Nempe ipsas talium rerum ideas, sive cogitationes, menti meae obversari. Sed ne nunc quidem illas ideas in me esse inficior. Aliud autem quiddam erat quod affirmabam, quodque etiam ob consuetudinem credendi clare me percipere arbitrabar, quod tamen revera non percipiebam: nempe res quasdam extra me esse, a quibus ideae [GT: "which ideas"] istae procedebant, & quibus omnino similes erant. Atque hoc erat, in quo vel fallebar, vel certe, si verum judicabam, id non ex vi meae perceptionis contingebat.

[4.] Quid vero? Cūm circa res Arithmeticas vel Geometricas aliquid valde simplex & facile considerabam , ut quod duo & tria simul juncta sint quinque, vel similia, nunquid saltem illa satis perspicue intuebar, ut vera esse affirmarem? Equidem non aliam ob causam de iis dubitandum esse postea judicavi, quam quia veniebat in mentem forte aliquem Deum talem mihi naturam indere potuisse, ut etiam circa illa deciperer, quae manifestissima viderentur. Sed quoties haec praeconcepta de summi Dei potentii opinio mihi occurrit, non possum non fateri, siquidem velit, facile illi esse efficere ut errem, etiam in iis quae me puto mentis oculis quam evidentissime intueri. Quoties vero ad ipsas res, quas valde clare percipere arbitror, me converto, tam plane ab illis persuadeor, ut sponte erumpam in has voces: fallat me quisquis potest, nunquam tamen efficiet ut nihil sim, quandiu me aliquid esse cogitabo; vel ut

Third Meditation 121

to be able to establish as a general rule that all that which I very clearly and distinctly perceive is true.

[3.] But yet I have previously admitted many things as completely certain and manifest which later I have still found to be dubious. What kinds of things therefore have these been? Obviously the earth, the heavens, the stars and all the other things that I grasped with the senses. But what concerning these things did I clearly perceive? Obviously that the [Idea₂] ideas or cogitations themselves of such things were before my mind. Yet not even now am I denying that these ideas are in me. But there was something else that I affirmed and also that — due to the custom of believing it — I thought that I clearly perceived, yet that I did not really and truly perceive, namely, that there were certain things outside me [Idea₃] from which those ideas proceeded and to which they were completely similar. And it was in this that I was deceived — or if I judged the true, it certainly did not happen by virtue of the power of my perception.

[4.] But then what? When I considered something very simple and easy about things arithmetical or geometrical, such as that two and three added together were five, or similar things, did I not then intuit at least these things perspicuously enough that I might affirm that they are true? I have indeed later judged that these things are to be doubted for no other reason than because it came to mind that some God could perhaps have given to me such a nature that I were to be deceived even about those things which would seem most manifest. But so often as there occurs to me this preconceived opinion about the very high pow-er of God, I cannot not admit that — if he were only to will it— it is easy for him to effect that I would err even in the things that I think that I most evidently intuit with the eyes of the mind. Yet so often as I turn to those things which I think that I very clearly perceive, I am so fully persuaded by them that I would spontaneously erupt in these words: "Whoever can, may deceive me, he will still never effect that I would be nothing, so long as I shall be cogitating that I am something, or that it would

[4.] aliquando verum sit me nunquam fuisse, cum jam verum sit me esse; vel forte etiam ut duo & tria simul juncta plura vel pauciora sint quam quinque, vel similia, in quibus scilicet repugnantiam agnosco manifestam. Et certe cum nullam occasionem habeam existimandi aliquem Deum esse deceptorem, nec quidem adhuc satis sciam utriim sit aliquis Deus, valde tenuis &, ut ita loquar, Metaphysica dubitandi ratio est, quae tantiim ex ea opinione dependet. Ut autem etiam illa tollatur, quamprimum occurret occasio, examinare debeo an sit Deus, &, si sit, an possit esse deceptor; hac enim re ignorati, non videor de ulli alia plane certus esse unquam posse.

[5.] Nunc autem ordo videtur exigere, ut prius omnes [37] meas cogitationes in certa genera distribuam [GT: "that I may first distribute all [37] my thoughts into certain classes"], & in quibusnam ex illis veritas aut falsitas proprie consistat, inquiram. Quaedam ex his tanquam rerum imagines sunt, quibus solis proprie convenit ideae nomen [GT: "Some of these are, as it were, images of things, to which only the name of an idea properly applies"]: ut cum hominem, vel Chimaeram, vel Coelum, vel Angelum, vel Deum cogito [GT: "as when I think of a man, or a Chimaera, or Heaven, or an Angel, or God"]. Aliae vero alias quasdam praeterea formas habent: ut, cum volo, cum timeo, cum affirmo, cilim nego, semper quidem aliquam rem ut subjectum meae cogitationis apprehendo [GT: "Others, on the other hand, have other forms in addition: when I want, when I fear, when I affirm, what I deny, I always grasp some thing as the subject of my thought"], sed aliquid etiam amplius quarn istius rei similitudinem cogitatione complector; & ex his aliae voluntates, sive affectus, aliae autem judicia appellantur [GT: "but something still more, that I comprehend the similitude of this thing in thought; And of these, other wills, or affections, and other judgments are called"].

[6.] Jam quod ad ideas attinet, si solae in se spectentur, nec ad aliud quid illas referam, falsae proprie esse non possunt [GT: "As regards ideas, if they are considered in themselves alone, and if I do not refer them to anything else, they cannot properly be false"]; nam sive capram, sive chimaeram imaginer, non minus verum est me unam imaginari quarn alteram. Nulla etiam in ipsa voluntate, vel affectibus, falsitas est timenda; nam, quamvis prava, quamvis etiam ea quae nusquam sunt, possim optare, non tamen ideo non verum est illa me optare. Ac proinde sola supersunt judicia, in quibus mihi cavendum est ne fallar. Praecipuus

Third Meditation 123

[4.] ever be true that I have never been, since it be now true that I am, or even perhaps that two and three added together would be more or less than five, or similar things, in which, I recognize a manifest contradiction." And since I would have no occasion for thinking that there is a deceiver God, and so far I would not even satisfactorily know whether there be any God at all, the reason for doubting which depends only on this opinion is certainly very tenuous and — as I would so say — metaphysical. But in order that even this reason for doubting might be removed I ought, as soon as the occasion will occur, to examine whether there be a God, and if there be, whether he could be a deceiver. For this matter being unknown, I do not seem to be able ever to be fully certain about any other matter.

[5.] But order now seems to require that I would [Idea₄] first classify all my cogitations into certain kinds, and that I would inquire as to in which of them truth or falsity were properly to consist. [Idea₅] Some of these cogitations are — as it were — the images of things— which ones alone the term "idea" properly fits— , such as then when I cogitate a human being, or a chimera, or heaven, or an angel, or God. But [Idea₆] other cogitations have, in addition, some other forms, such as when I will, when I fear, when I affirm, when I deny, I surely always then apprehend some thing as the subject of my cogitation, but by cogitation I also encompass something more than the similitude of that thing. And of [Idea₇] these cogitations some are called "volitions" or "emotions", but others are called "judgments."

[6.] Now as for what pertains to [Idea₈] ideas, if they were to be regarded solely in themselves and I were not to refer them to something else, they cannot properly be false. For whether I would imagine a goat or a chimera, it is no less true that I imagine the one than the other. Moreover, no falsity is to be feared in the will itself or in the emotions. For although I could wish for depraved things, and although I could even wish for those things which nowhere are, it is still not therefore not true that I wish for them. And thus there remain judgments alone in which I have to be cautious in order that I would not be deceived.

Meditatio tertia

[6.] Praecipuus autem error & frequentissimus qui possit in illis reperiri, consistit in eo quod ideas, quae in me sunt, judicem rebus quibusdam extra me positis similes esse sive conformes; nam profecto, si tantilm ideas ipsas ut cogitationis meae quosdam modos considerarem, nec ad quidquam aliud referrem [GT: "for indeed, if I were to consider the ideas themselves so much as to consider certain modes of my thought, and not to refer to anything else"], vix mihi ullam errandi materiam dare possent. [GT: "and the most frequent error which can be found in them consists in the fact that the ideas which are in me judge that they are similar or conform to certain things placed outside me; for indeed, if I considered the ideas themselves so much as to consider certain modes of my thought, and did not refer to anything else, they could scarcely give me any material for error."]

[7.] Ex his autem ideis aliae innatae, aliae adventitiae, [38] aliae a me ipso factae mihi videntur: nam quod intelligam quid sit res, quid sit veritas, quid sit cogitatio, haec non aliunde habere videor quam ab ipsamet mea naturi; quod autem nunc strepitum audiam, solem videam, ignem sentiam, a rebus quibusdam extra me positis procedere hactenus judicavi; ac denique Syrenes, Hippogryphes, & similia, a me ipso finguntur. Vel forte etiam omnes esse adventitias possum putare, vel omnes innatas, vel omnes factas: nondum enim veram illarum originem clare perspexi.

[8.] Sed hic praecipue de iis est quaerendum, quas tanquam a rebus extra me existentibus desumptas considero, quaenam me moveat ratio ut illas istis rebus similes esse existimem. Nempe ita videor doctus a naturi. Et praeterea experior illas non a mea voluntate nec proinde a me ipso pendere; saepe enim vel invito obversantur: ut jam, sive velim, sive nolim, sentio calorem, & ideo puto sensum illum, sive ideam caloris, a re a me diversa, nempe ab ignis cui assideo calore, mihi advenire. Nihilque magis obvium est, quam ut judicem istam rem suam similitudinem potius quam aliud quid in me immittere.

[9.] Quae rationes, a satis firmae sint, jam videbo. Cūm hic dico me ita doctum esse a naturi, intelligo tantiim spontaneo quo-

Third Meditation 125

[6.] Furthermore, the foremost and most frequent error that could be found in judgments consists therein that I were to judge that [Idea₉] ideas that are in me are similar to—or conform to—certain things posited outside me. For if I did in fact consider these [Idea₁₀] ideas only as certain modes of my cogitation and I did not refer them to anything they could hardly give to me any material for erring.

[7.] Furthermore, of the [Idea₁₁] ideas some seem to me to be innate, while others seem to me to be adventicious, and still others seem to me to be made by me. For that I were to understand what a thing be, what truth be and what cogitation be: these things I seem to have not from elsewhere than from my own nature itself. But that I were now to hear a noise, that I were to see the sun and that I were to sense a fire: these things I have hitherto judged to proceed from certain things posited outside me. And sirens, hippogryphs and similar things, finally, are feigned by me myself. Or perhaps I can also think that all these ideas are adventicious, or that all of them are innate, or that all of them are made. For I have not yet clearly seen through to the true origin of them.

[8.] But here it is first and foremost to be asked about the [Idea₁₂] ideas that I consider as though they were derived from things existing outside me what reason would move me in such a way that I would think that those ideas are similar to these things. Obviously I seem to have been thus taught by nature. And moreover, I know by experience that [Idea₁₃] 'these ideas do not depend on my will, and therefore that they do not depend on me myself. For often these ideas are before me even involuntarily: just as— whether I would want to or not want to — I now sense warmth, and therefore I think that this [Idea₁₄] sensation or idea of warmth comes to me from a thing different from me, namely, from the warmth of the fire by which I am sitting. And nothing is more obvious than that I were to judge that that thing immits into me its similitude rather than something else.

[9.] I shall now see whether these reasons be firm enough. When I say here that "I have been thus taught by nature", then

126 Meditatio tertia Third Meditation 127

[9.] dam impetu me ferri ad hoc credendum, non lumine aliquo naturali mihi ostendi esse verum. Quae duo multum discrepant; nam quaecumque lumine naturali mihi ostenduntur, ut qubd ex eo qu6d dubitem, sequatur me esse, & similia, nullo modo dubia esse possunt, quia nulla alia facultas esse potest, cui aeque fidam ac lumini isti, quaeque illa [39] non vera esse possit docere; sed quantum ad impetus naturales, jam saepe olim judicavi me ab illis in deteriorem partem fuisse impulsum, cum de bono eligendo ageretur, nec video cur iisdem in ulla alii re magis fidam.

[10.] Deinde, quamvis ideae illae a voluntate mei non pendeant, non ideo constat ipsas a rebus extra me positis necessario procedere. Ut enim impetus illi, de quibus mox loquebar, quamvis in me sint, a voluntate tamen mei diversi csse videntur, ita forte etiam aliqua alia est in me facultas, nondum mihi satis cognita, istarum idearum effectrix, ut hactenus semper visum est illas, dum somnio, absque ulli rerum externarum ope, in me formari.

[11.] Ac denique, quamvis a rebus a me diversis procederent, non inde sequitur illas rebus istis similes esse debere. Quinimo in multis saepe magnum discrimen videor deprehendisse: ut, exempli causi , duas diversas solis ideas apud me invenio, unam tanquam a sensibus haustam, & quae maxime inter illas quas adventitias existimo est recensenda, per quam mihi valde parvus apparet, aliam vera ex rationibus Astronomiae desumptam, hoc est ex notionibus quibusdam mihi innatis elicitam, vel quocunque alio modo a me factam, per quam aliquoties major quam terra exhibetur; utraque profecto similis eidem soli

[9.] do I understand only that I am brought to believe this by a certain spontaneous impetus, not that it is shown to me by some natural light that it is true. Which two things are very different. For whatever things are shown to me by the natural light — such as that from thence that I were to doubt, it would follow that I am, and similar things— can in no mode be dubious, because there can be no other faculty that I could trust equally to that light and that could teach me that such things are not true. But as for the natural impetuses, already I have often judged earlier that I have then been impelled by them to the worse alternative when it were a matter of choosing the good, and I do not see why I would trust the same impetuses more in any other matter.

[10.] Then again, although these [Idea₁₅] ideas might not depend on my will, it is not therefore so, that they necessarily proceed from things posited outside me. For just as these impetuses of which I then spoke, although they might be in me, still seem to be different from my will, thus also is there perhaps some other faculty in me which is not yet sufficiently known to me and which is the effecter of these [Idea₁₆] ideas, as it has hitherto always seemed that these [Idea₁₆] ideas are formed in me while I am dreaming and without any help of external things.

[11.] And finally, although these [Idea₁₇] ideas might proceed from things different from me, it does not from thence follow that those ideas must be similar to these things. Indeed, I seem to have often found a great discrepancy in many things: just as I find within me, for example, two different [Idea₁₈]ideas of the sun, the one, as though derived from the senses, which is maximally to be reckoned among those ideas which I think are adventitious, and through which the sun appears to me to be very small, but the [Idea₁₉] other, derived from the reasoning of astronomy, that is, elicited from certain notions innate to me or made by me in some other manner, and through which the sun is exhibited as being several times greater than the earth. Both these ideas cannot in fact be similar to the same sun existing outside me,

128 129

[11.] extra me existenti esse non potest, & ratio persuadet illam ei maxime esse dissimilem, quae qum proxime ab ipso videtur

[12.] Quae omnia satis demonstrant me non hactenus ex [40] certo judicio, sed tantiim ex caeco aliquo impulsu, credidisse res quasdam a me diversas existere, quae ideas sive imagines suas per organa sensuum, vel quolibet alio pacto, mihi immittant.

[13.] Sed alia quaedam adhuc via mihi occurrit ad inquirendum an res aliquae, ex iis quarum ideae in me sunt, extra me existant. Nempe, quatenus ideae istae cogitandi quidam modi tantūm sunt, non agnosco ullam inter ipsas inaequalitatem, & omnes a me eodem modo procedere videntur; sed, quatenus una unam rem, alia aliam repraesentat, patet easdem esse ab invicem valde diversas. Nam proculdubio illae quae substantias mihi exhibent, majus aliquid sunt, atque, ut ita loquar, plus realitatis objectivae in se continent, qum illae quae tantiim modos, sive accidentia, repraesentant; & rursus illa per quam summum aliquem Deum, aeternum, infinitum, omniscium, omnipotentem, rerumque omnium, quae praeter ipsum sunt, creatorem intelligo, plus profecto realitatis objectivae in se habet, qum illae per quas finitae substantiae exhibentur.

[14.] Jam vero lumine naturali manifestum est tantumdem ad minimum esse debere in causi efficiente & totali, quantum in ejusdem causae effectu. Nam, quaeso, undenam posset assumere realitatem suam effectus, nisi a causa? Et quomodo illam ei causa dare posset, nisi etiam haberet? Hinc autem sequitur, nec posse aliquid a nihilo fieri, nec etiam id quod magis perfectum est, hoc est quod plus realitatis in se con[41]tinet, ab eo quod minus. Atque hoc non modo perspicue verum est de iis effectibus, quorum realitas est actualis sive formalis, sed etiam de ideis,

[11.] and reason persuades me that that one which seems to have emanated from it most proximally is maximally dissimilar to it.

[12.] All which things satisfactorily demonstrate that I have hitherto believed not by certain judgment, but rather only by some blind impulse, that there exist certain things different from me which would immit [Idea₁₆] ideas or their images into me through the organs of the senses or in some other way whatever.

[13.] But there occurs to me yet a certain other way of inquiring as to whether some of those things whose [Idea₁₇] ideas are in me would exist outside me. In so far as these [Idea₁₈] ideas are only certain modes of cogitating, I surely do not recognize any inequality among them, and they all seem to proceed from me in the same mode. But in so far as the one [Idea₁₉] idea represents one thing, and the other idea represents another thing, it is obvious that these ideas are very different from one another. For those [Idea₂₀] ideas which exhibit substances to me are without doubt something greater, and— as I would so speak— they contain more objective reality in themselves, than those ideas which represent only modes or accidents. And again, that idea through which I understand a highest God — eternal, infinite, omniscient, omnipotent and the creator of all the things that, besides him, are— has in fact more objective reality in itself than those ideas through which finite substances are exhibited.

[14.] But now it is manifest by the natural light that there must be at a minimum just as much [reality] in the efficient and total cause as there is in the effect of the same cause. For from whence, I ask, could the effect get its reality if not from the cause? And how could the cause give reality to the effect, if it did not also have it? Furthermore, from thence it follows both that something cannot come to be from nothing, and also that that which is more perfect — that is, that which contains in itself more reality — cannot come to be from that which is less perfect. And this is perspicuously true not only of those effects whose reality is actual or formal, but also of ideas, in which only objective reality is considered.

130 Meditatio tertia

[14.] in quibus consideratur tantim realitas objectiva. Hoc est, non modo non potest, exempli causa, aliquis lapis, qui prius non fuit, nunc incipere esse, nisi producatur ab aliqui re in qui totum sit vel formaliter vel eminenter, quod ponitur in lapide; nec potest calor in subjectum quod priiis non calebat induci, nisi a re quae sit ordinis saltem aeque perfecti atque est calor, & sic de caeteris; sed praeterea etiam non potest in me esse idea caloris, vel lapidis, nisi in me posita sit ab aliqua causa, in qui tantumdem ad minimum sit realitatis quantum esse in calore vel lapide concipio. Nam quamvis ista causa nihil de sui realitate actuali sive formali in meam ideam transfundat, non ideo putandum est illam minus realem esse debere, sed talem esse naturam ipsius ideae, ut nullam aliam ex se realitatem formalem exigat, praeter illam quam mutuatur a cogitatione mea, cujus est modus. Quod autem haec idea realitatem objectivam hanc vel illam contineat potius qum aliam, hoc profecto habere debet ab aliqui causa in qui tantumdem sit ad minimum realitatis formalis quantum ipsa continet objectivae. Si enim ponamus aliquid in idei reperiri, quod non fuerit in ejus causa , hoc igitur habet a nihilo; atqui quantumvis imperfectus sit iste essendi modus, quo res est objective in intellectu per ideam, non tamen profecto plane nihil est, nec proinde a nihilo esse potest.

[15.] Nec etiam debeo suspicari, cūm realitas quam considero in meis ideis sit tantiim objectiva, non opus [42] esse ut eadem realitas sit formaliter in causis istarum idearum, sed sufficere, si sit in iis etiam objective. Nam quemadmodum iste modus essendi objectivus competit ideis ex ipsarum natura, ita modus essendi formalis competit idearum causis, saltem primis & praecipuis, ex earum natura. Et quamvis forte una idea ex alii nasci possit, non tamen hic datur progressus in infinitum, sed tandem ad aliquam primam debet deveniri, cujus causa sit in-

Third Meditation 131

[14.] is considered. That is, for example, not only cannot a stone which has not previously been begin now to be unless it would be produced by something in which there were formally or eminently all that which is posited in the stone; and heat cannot be introduced into a subject that was not previously hot except by a thing that were of an order at least equally as perfect as is the heat, and thus of the other things; but moreover, even the idea of heat or of a stone cannot be in me unless it had been posited in me by some cause in which there were at a minimum just as much reality as I conceive there to be in the heat or in the stone. For although this cause were to transfer none of its actual or formal reality into my idea, it is not therefore to be thought that it must be less real, but rather is it to be thought that the nature of that idea is such that of itself it would require no other formal reality besides that which it borrows from my cogitation, whose mode it is. Furthermore, that this idea would contain this or that objective reality rather than some other: this it must in fact have from some cause in which there were at a minimum just as much formal reality as this idea contains objective reality. For if we were to posit that something is found in the idea that had not been in its cause, this it has, then, from nothing. And yet however imperfect that you will that mode of being might be in which the thing is objectively in the intellect through the idea, it still is in fact plainly not nothing, and therefore it cannot be from nothing.

[15.] Nor must I suspect that, because the reality that I consider in my ideas be only objective, it is not necessary that the same reality be formally in the causes of these ideas, but rather that it suffices if it were in them too objectively. For just as that objective mode of being belongs to the ideas by the nature of them, so the formal mode of being belongs to the causes of the ideas— at least to the first and foremost ones — by the nature of them. And although one idea could perhaps arise from another, an infinite regress is still not given here, but rather must it come down, finally, to a primary idea, whose cause would

133

[15.] star archetypi, in quo omnis realitas formaliter contineatur, quae est in idea tantum objective. Adeo ut lumine naturali mihi sit perspicuum ideas in me esse veluti quasdam imagines, quae possunt quidem facile deficere a perfectione rerum a quibus sunt desumptae, non autem quicquam majus aut perfectius continere.

[16.] Atque haec omnia, quo diutius & curiosius examino, tante clarius & distinctius vera esse cognosco. Sed quid tandem ex his concludam? Nempe si realitas objectiva alicujus ex meis ideis sit tanta ut certus sim eandem nec formaliter nec eminenter in me esse, nec proinde me ipsum ejus ideae causam esse posse, hinc necessario sequi, non me solum esse in mundo, sed aliquam aliam rem, quae istius ideae est causa, etiam existere. Si vera nulla talis in me idea reperiatur, nullum plane habebo argumentum quod me de alicujus rei a me diversae existentia certum reddat; omnia enim diligentissime circumspexi, & nullum aliud potui hactenus reperire.

[17.] Ex his autem meis ideis, praeter illam quae me ipsum mihi exhibet, de qua hic nulla difficultas esse [43] potest, alia est quae Deum, aliae quae res corporeas & inanimes, aliae quae Angelos, aliae quae animalia, ac denique aliae quae alios homines mei similes repraesentant.

[18.] Et quantum ad ideas quae alios homines, vel animalia, vel Angelos exhibent, facile intelligo illas ex its quas habeo mei ipsius & rerum corporalium & Dei posse componi, quamvis nulli praeter me homines, nec animalia, nec Angeli, in mundo essent.

[19.] Quantum autem ad ideas rerum corporalium, nihil in illis occurrit, quod sit tantum ut non videatur a me ipso potuisse proficisci; nam si penitius inspiciam, & singulas examinem eo modo quo heri examinavi ideam cerae, animadverto perpauca

[15.] be like an archetype in which all the reality that is in the idea only objectively be contained formally. So that by the natural light it would be perspicuous to me that the ideas in me are like certain images which surely can easily be deficient in the perfection of the things from which they have been derived, but which cannot contain anything greater or more perfect.

[16.] And the longer and the more curiously I examine them, the more clearly and distinctly do I cognize that all these things are true. But what shall I, finally, conclude from them? Surely that if the objective reality of any one of my ideas were so great that I would be certain that the same reality is neither formally nor eminently in me, and therefore that I myself cannot be the cause of this idea, it necessarily follows therefrom that I am not alone in the world, but rather that there also exists some other thing which is the cause of that idea. But if no such idea were to be found in me, I shall plainly have no argument that might render me certain about the existence of anything different from me. For I have most diligently looked around at all things and have hitherto been able to find nothing else.

[17.] But of these my ideas, besides that one which exhibits me myself to me— about which there can be no difficulty here— , there is another one, which represents God, there are others, which represent corporeal and inanimate things, others, which represent angels, others, which represent animals, and finally others, which represent other human beings similar to me.

[18.] And as for the ideas that exhibit other human beings, or animals, or angels, I easily understand that they can be composed of the ideas that I have of me myself and of corporeal things and of God, even if there were no human beings besides me, nor animals, nor angels, in the world.

[19.] But as for the ideas of corporeal things, there occurs in them nothing that would be so great that it would not seem that it can have come from me myself. For if I were to inspect more penetratingly and were to examine these ideas individually in that manner in which I have yesterday examined the idea of the wax, I notice that there are only very few things in them

135 136

[19.] tantum esse quae in illis dare & distincte percipio: nempe magnitudinem, sive extensionem in longum, latum, & profundum; figuram, quae ex terminatione istius extensionis exsurgit; siturn, quem diversa figurata inter se obtinent; & motum, sive mutationem istius situs; quibus addi possunt substantia, duratio, & numerus: caetera autem, ut lumen & colores, soni, odores, sapores, calor & frigus, aliaeque tactiles qualitates, non-nisi valde confuse & obscure a me cogitantur, adeo ut etiam ignorem an sint verae, vel falsae, hoc est, an ideae, quas de illis habeo, sint rerum quarundam ideae, an non rerum. Quamvis enim falsitatem proprie dictam, sive formalem, nonnisi in judiciis posse reperiri paulo ante notaverim, est tamen profecto quaedam alia falsitas materialis in ideis, dim non rem tanquam rem repraesentant: ita, exempli causa, ideae quas habeo caloris & frigoris, tam parum clarae [44] & distinctae sunt, ut ab its discere non possim, an frigus sit tantam privatio caloris, vel calor privatio frigoris, vel utrumque sit realis qualitas, vel neutrum. Et quia nullae ideae nisi tanquam rerum esse possunt, siquidem verum sit frigus nihil aliud esse quam privationem caloris, idea quae mihi illud tanquam reale quid & positivum repraesentat, non immerito falsa dicetur, & sic de

[20.] Quibus profecto non est necesse ut aliquem authorem a me diversum assignem; nam, si quidem sint falsae, hoc est nullas res repraesentent, lumine naturali notum mihi est illas a nihilo procedere, hoc est, non aliam ob causam in me esse quam quia deest aliquid naturae meae, nec est plane perfecta; si autem sint verae, quia tamen tam parum realitatis mihi exhibent, ut ne quidem illud a non re possim distinguere, non video cur a me ipso esse non possint.

[21.] Ex its vero quae in ideis rerum corporalium clara & distincta sunt, quaedam ab idei mei ipsius videor mutuari potuisse, nempe substantiam, durationem, numerum, & si quae alia sint

[19.] that I clearly and distinctly perceive: namely, magnitude, or extension in length, breadth and depth; figure, which arises from the determination of this extension; position, which different shaped things obtain among themselves; and movement, or the change of this position; to which can be added substance, duration and number. But the other things, such as light, and colors, sounds, odors, tastes, heat and cold, and other tactile qualities, are not cogitated by me except very confusedly and obscurely — so much so that I even be ignorant as to whether they would be true or false, that is, as to whether the ideas that I have of them would be ideas of certain things, or not of things. For although shortly previously I might have noted that falsity — properly said, or formal falsity — cannot be found except in judgments, there still is in fact a certain other— material— falsity in ideas, then when they represent a non-thing as if it were a thing: just as, for example, the ideas that I have of heat and cold are so little clear and distinct that I could not discern from them whether cold would be only the privation of heat or heat would be only the privation of cold, or whether both of them would be real qualities, or neither would be. And because there can be no ideas except — as it were — ideas of things, if it would indeed be true that cold is nothing other than the privation of heat, the idea that represents it to me as if it were something real and positive will not without merit be called "false". And thus of the other ideas.

[20.] To which ideas it is in fact not necessary that I would assign an author different from me. For if they would indeed be false, that is, would represent no things, it is known to me by the natural light that they proceed from nothing, that is, that they are in me not for another reason than because something is lacking in my nature and this nature is plainly not perfect. But if they would be true, because they still exhibit to me so little reality that I could not even distinguish it from a non-thing, I do not see why they could not be from me myself.

[21.] But some of the things that are clear and distinct in the ideas of corporeal things I seem to have been able to borrow from the idea of me myself, namely, substance, duration, num-

137 138

[21.] ejusmodi; nam cum cogito lapidem esse substantiam, sive esse rem quae per se apta est existere, itemque me esse substantiam, quamvis concipiam me esse rem cogitantem & non extensam, lapidem ver6 esse rem extensam & non cogitantem, ac proinde maxima inter utrumque conceptum sit diversitas, in ratione tamen substantiae videntur convenire; itemque, dim percipio me nunc esse, & prius etiam aliquamdiu fuisse recordor, dimque varias habeo cogitationes quarum numerum intelligo, acquiro [45] ideas durationis & numeri, quas deinde ad quascunque alias res possum transferre. Caetera autem omnia ex quibus rerum corporearum ideae conflantur, nempe extensio, figura, situs, & motus, in me quidem, dim nihil aliud sim quam res cogitans, formaliter non continentur; sed quia sunt tantiim modi quidam substantiae, ego autem substantia, videntur in me contineri posse eminenter.

[22.] Itaque sola restat idea Dei, in qua considerandum est an aliquid sit quod a me ipso non potuerit proficisci. Dei nomine intelligo substantiam quandam infinitam, independentem, summe intelligentem, summe potentem, & a qua tum ego ipse, tum aliud omne, si quid aliud extat, quodcumque extat, est creatum. Quae sane omnia talia sunt ut, quo diligentius attendo, tanto minus a me solo profecta esse posse videantur. Ideoque ex antedictis, Deum necessario existere, est concludendum.

[23.] Nam quamvis substantiae quidem idea in me sit ex hoc ipso quad sim substantia, non tamen idcirco esset idea substantiae infinitae, cam sim finitus, nisi ab aliqus substantis, quae revera esset infinita, procederet.

[24.] Nec putare debeo me non percipere infinitum per veram ideam, sed tantam per negationem finiti, ut percipio quietem

[21.] ber and whatever other things there might be of this kind. For when I cogitate that a stone is a substance—or that it is a thing that is fit to exist through itself—and also that I am a substance, although I were then to conceive that I am a cogitating and not an extended thing, but that a stone is an extended and not a cogitating thing; and therefore that the difference between both these concepts were maximal, by reason thereof that they both represent a substance they still seem to agree with each other. And when I also perceive that I now am and remember that I have also previously been for some time, and when I have various cogitations whose number I understand, I then acquire the ideas of duration and number, which ideas I can then transfer to whatever other things. But all the other things of which the ideas of corporeal things are made up, namely, extension, figure, position and movement, are surely not contained in me formally, since I be nothing other than a cogitating thing. Yet because they are only certain modes of a substance—whereas / am a substance — , they seem to be able to be contained in me eminently.

[22.] And thus there remains solely the idea of God in which it is to be considered whether there would be something that could not have come from me myself. By the term "God" I understand a substance: a substance infinite, independent, most highly intelligent, most highly powerful, and by which both I myself and everything else that is extant—if something else is extant—have been created. All which things are indeed such that, the more diligently I pay attention to them, so much the less would they seem to be able to have come from me alone. And from those things which have been said before it is to be concluded that therefore God necessarily exists.

[23.] For although the idea of substance would surely be in me from thence itself that I be a substance, since I be finite, this idea would therefore still not be the idea of an infinite substance unless it did proceed from some other substance which really and truly were infinite.

[24.] And I must not think that I perceive the infinite not through a true idea, but rather only through the negation of

138 139

[24.] & tenebras per negationem moths & lucis; nam contra manifeste intelligo plus realitatis esse in substantia infinita quam in finita, ac proinde priorem quodammodo in me esse perceptionem infiniti quam finiti, hoc est Dei quam mei ipsius. Qua enim ratione intelligerem me dubitare, me [46] cupere, hoc est, aliquid mihi deesse, & me non esse omnino perfectum, si nulla idea entis perfectioris in me esset, ex cujus comparatione defectus meos agnoscerem?

[25.] Nec dici potest hanc forte ideam Dei materialiter falsam esse, ideoque a nihilo esse posse, ut paulo ante de ideis caloris & frigoris, & similium, animadverti; nam contra, dim maxime clara & distincta sit, & plus realitatis objectivae quam ulla alia contineat, nulla est per se magis vera, nec in qua minor falsitatis suspicio reperiatur. Est, inquam, haec idea entis summe perfecti & infiniti maxime vera; nam quamvis forte fingi possit tale ens non existere, non tamen fingi potest ejus ideam nihil reale mihi exhibere, ut de idea frigoris ante dixi. Est etiam maxime clara & distincta; nam quidquid Clare & distincte percipio, quod est reale & verum, & quod perfectionem aliquam importat, totum in ea continetur. Nec obstat quod non comprehendam infinitum, vel quod alia innumera in Deo sint, quae nec comprehendere, nec forte etiam attingere cogitatione, ullo modo possum; est enim de ratione infiniti, ut a me, qui sum finitus, non comprehendatur; & sufficit me hoc ipsum intelligere, ac judicare, illa omnia quae Clare percipio, & perfectionem aliquam importare scio, atque etiam forte alia innumera quae ignoro, vel formaliter vel eminenter in Deo esse, ut idea quam de illo habeo sit omnium quae in me sunt maxime vera, & maxime clara & distincta.

[24.] the finite, just as I perceive rest and shadows through the negation of movement and of light. For — on the contrary — I manifestly understand that there is more reality in an infinite substance than there is in a finite one, and therefore that the perception of the infinite is in me in some mode prior to the perception of the finite, that is, that the perception of God is in me in some mode prior to the perception of me myself. For how would I understand that I doubt and that I desire, that is, that something is lacking in me and that I am not completely perfect, if there were no idea of a more perfect being in me from whose comparison I might recognize my defects?

[25.] And it cannot be said that this idea of God is perhaps materially false and therefore that it can be from nothing, just as I have shortly previously noted concerning the ideas of heat and cold and similar things. For—on the contrary—because this idea of God be maximally clear and distinct, and because it contain more objective reality than any other idea, there is no idea more true through itself, nor is there any idea in which less suspicion of falsity would be found. This idea of a most highly perfect and infinite being is, I say, maximally true. For although it could perhaps be feigned that such a being does not exist, it still cannot be feigned that the idea of it exhibits nothing real to me, just as I have said before of the idea of cold. Moreover, this idea is maximally clear and distinct. For whatever I clearly and distinctly perceive that is real and true and that implies some perfection is totally contained in that idea. And it is not an obstacle to this that I would not comprehend the infinite, or that there would be innumerable other things in God that I can in no way either comprehend or even perhaps attain to by cogitation. For it is of the nature of the infinite that it not be comprehended by me, who am finite. And it suffices that I understand this itself, and that I judge that all those things which I clearly perceive and which I know to imply some perfection—and also perhaps innumerable other things of which I am ignorant—are formally or eminently in God, in order that the idea that I have of him might be the maximally true and the maximally clear and distinct idea of all the ideas that are in me.

140

[26.] Sed forte majus aliquid sum c.thm ipse intelligam, omnesque illae perfectiones quas Deo tribuo , potentia quodammodo in me sunt, etiamsi nondum sese exe[47]rant, neque ad actum reducantur. Experior enim jam cognitionem meam paulatim augeri; nec video quid obstet quominus ita magis & magis augeatur in infinitum, nec etiam cur, cognitione sic aucta, non possim ejus ope reliquas omnes Dei perfectiones adipisci; nec denique cur potentia ad istas perfectiones, si jam in me est, non sufficiat ad illarum ideam producendam.

[27.] Imo nihil horum esse potest. Nam primo, ut verum sit cognitionem meam gradatim augeri, & multa in me esse potentia quae actu nondum sunt, nihil tamen horum ad ideam Dei pertinet, in qui nempe nihil omnino est potentiale; namque hoc ipsum, gradatim augeri, certissimum est imperfectionis argumentum. Praeterea, etiamsi cognitio mea semper magis & magis augeatur, nihilominus intelligo nunquam illam idcirco fore actu infinitam, quia nunquam eo devenietur, ut majoris adhuc incrementi non sit capax; Deum autem ita judico esse actu infinitum, ut nihil ejus perfectioni addi possit. Ac denique percipio esse objectivum ideae non a solo esse potentiali, quod proprie loquendo nihil est, sed tantummodo ab actuali sive formali posse produci.

[28.] Neque profecto quicquam est in his omnibus, quod diligenter attendenti non sit lumine naturali manifestum; sed quia, cūm minus attendo, & rerum sensibilium imagines mentis aciem excaecant, non ita facile recordor cur idea entis me perfectioris necessariO ab ente aliquo procedat quod sit revera perfectius, ulte[48]rius quaerere libet an ego ipse habens illam ideam esse possem, si tale ens nullum existeret.

[26.] But perhaps I am something greater than I myself might understand, and all those perfections which I attribute to God are in some mode in me potentially, even if they themselves had not yet come out and they would not be reduced to act. For I am now getting to know that my cognition is gradually becoming greate.r, and I do not see what would be an obstacle thereto that it would thus increase more and more into the infinite; and I also do not see why — the cognition having thus increased — I could with the help of it not get all the remaining perfections of God; and finally, I do not see why the potentiality for producing these perfections, if it is already in me, would not suffice to produce the idea of them.

[27.] But none of these things can be the case. For first, granted that it be true that my cognition is gradually becoming greater, and that many things are in me potentially that are not yet in me actually, still none of these things pertains to the idea of God — in which surely nothing at all is potential. For this itself — to increase gradually — is a most certain argument for imperfection. Moreover, even if my cognition were always to increase more and more, I nonetheless understand that it will never therefore be actually infinite, because it will never be achieved by it that it would not be capable of even greater increase. But I so judge that God is actually infinite that nothing could be added to his perfection. And finally, I perceive that the objective being of an idea cannot be produced by potential being alone, which is — properly speaking— nothing, but rather can the objective being of an idea be produced only by actual or formal being.

[28.] And in fact there is not anything whatsoever in all these things that would not be manifest by the natural light to one who is diligently paying attention. But because when I pay less attention, and the images of sensible things blind the vision of the mind, I do not then so easily remember why the idea of a being more perfect than me would necessarily proceed from a being that really and truly be more perfect than me, it is fitting to ask, in addition, whether I — / myself as one having this idea — could be if no such being did exist.

142 – 143

[29.] Nempe a quo essem? A me scilicet, vel a parentibus, vel ab aliis quibuslibet Deo minus perfectis; nihil enim ipso perfectius, nec etiam aeque perfectum, cogitari aut fingi potest.

[30.] Atqui, si a me essem, nec dubitarem, nec optarem, nec omnino quicquam mihi deesset; omnes enim perfectiones quarum idea aliqua in me est, mihi dedissem, atque ita ipsemet Deus essem. Nec putare debeo illa forsan quae mihi desunt difficilius acquiri posse, quArn illa quae jam in me sunt; nam contrA, manifestum est longe difficilius fuisse me, hoc est rem sive substantiam cogitantem, ex nihilo emergere, quarn multarum rerum quas ignoro cognitiones, quae tantiim istius substantiae accidentia sunt, acquirere. Ac certe, si majus illud a me haberem, non mihi illa saltem, quae facilius haberi possunt, denegassem, sed neque etiam ulla alia ex iis, quae in idea Dei contineri percipio; quia nempe nulla difficiliora factu mihi videntur; si quae autem difficiliora factu essent, certe etiam mihi difficiliora viderentur, siquidem reliqua quae habeo, a me haberem, quoniam in illis potentiam meam terminari experirer.

[31.] Neque vim harum rationum effugio, si supponam me forte semper fuisse ut nunc sum, tanquam si inde sequeretur, nullum existentiae meae authorem esse quaerendum. Quoniam enim omne tempus vitae in [49] partes innumeras dividi potest, quarum singulae a reliquis nullo modo dependent, ex eo qu6d paulo ante fuerim, non sequitur me nunc debere esse, nisi aliqua causa me quasi rursus creet ad hoc momentum, hoc est me conservet. Perspicuum enim est attendenti ad temporis naturam, eidem plane vi & actione opus esse ad rem quamlibet singulis

[29.] From whom, then, would I be? From myself, of course *, or from my parents, or from whatever other things less perfect than God. For nothing more perfect than him, nor even anything equally as perfect as he, can be cogitated or feigned.

[30.] But if I were from me, neither would I doubt, nor would I wish, nor​anything at all be lacking in me. For I would have given to me all the perfections of which there is some idea in me, and thus would I myself be God. And I must not think that those things which are lacking in me can perhaps be more difficult to acquire than those things which are in me now. For — on the contrary— it is manifest that it would have been more difficult by far that I, that is, a cogitating thing or a cogitating substance, emerge from nothing than that I acquire the cognitions of many things of which I am ignorant, which cognitions are only the accidents of that substance. And if I were to have that greater thing— that I as a cogitating thing or substance had emerged from nothing — from me, I would certainly not have denied to me at least those things which can be had more easily, but nor would I have denied to me even any other things of those which I perceive to be contained in the idea of God, because surely none of these things seems to me to be more difficult to make. But if they were more difficult to make, certainly they would also seem to me to be more difficult, if I did indeed have the remaining things that I have from me, because I would know by experience that my power terminates in them.

[31.] And I do not escape the force of these arguments if I were to suppose that I have perhaps always been just as I am now, as if it would therefrom follow that about no author of my existence is to be asked. For because every lifetime can be divided into innumerable parts, each one of which in no way depends on the others, it does not follow from thence that I had been shortly before, that I must be now, unless some cause were — as it were — to create me again at this moment, that is, to preserve me. For it is perspicuous to one who is paying attention to the nature of time that plainly the same power and action are needed to preserve anything whatever at the individual

144 145

momentis quibus durat conservandam, qua opus esset ad eandem de novo creandam, si nondum existeret; adeo ut conservationem soli ratione a creatione differre, sit etiam unum ex iis quae lumine naturali manifesta sunt.

Itaque debeo nunc interrogare me ipsum, an habeam aliquam vim per quam possim efficere ut ego ille, qui jam sum, paulo post etiam sim futurus: nam, cum nihil aliud sim qukn res cogitans, vel saltem cum de ei tantiim mei parte praecise nunc agam quae est res cogitans, si quae talis vis in me esset, ejus proculdubio conscius essem. Sed & nullam esse experior, & ex hoc ipso evidentissime cognosco me ab aliquo ente a me diverso pendere.

Forte vero illud ens non est Deus, sumque vel a parentibus productus, vel a quibuslibet aliis causis Deo minus perfectis. Imo, ut jam ante dixi, perspicuum est tantumdem ad minimum esse debere in causi quantum est in effectu; & idcirco, cum sim res cogitans, ideamque quandam Dei in me habens, qualiscunque tandem mei causa assignetur, illam etiam esse rem cogitantem, & omnium perfectionum, quas Deo tribuo, ideam habere fatendum est. Potestque de illa rursus quaeri, a sit a se, vel ab alii. Nam si a se, patet ex dictis illam ipsam Deum esse, quia nempe, [50] cum vim habeat per se existendi, habet proculdubio etiam vim possidendi actu omnes perfectiones quarum ideam in se habet, hoc est omnes quas in Deo esse concipio. Si autem sit ab aliA, rursus eodem modo de hac alteri quaeretur, a sit a se, vel ab alii, donec tandem ad causam ultimam deveniatur, quae erit Deus.

Satis enim apertum est nullum hic dari posse progressum in infinitum, praesertim cum non tantiim de causi, quae me olim produxit, hic agam, sed maxime etiam de illa quae me tempore praesenti conservat.

moments at which it endures which would be needed to create the same thing from anew if it did not yet exist. Hence, that preservation differs from creation solely by a distinction of reason would also be one of the things that are manifest by the natural light.

[32.] And thus I must now ask me myself whether I would have some power through which I could effect that I — as that I who I am now— am also going to be a little later on. For since I be nothing other than a cogitating thing— or at least since I be now dealing with precisely only the part of me that is a cogitating thing— , I would without doubt be conscious of it if there were such a power in me. But I also know by experience that there is none, and from thence itself I cognize most evidently that I depend on some being different from me.

[33.] Yet perhaps this being is not God, and I have been produced by my parents or by whatever other causes less perfect than God. But just as I have already said before, it is perspicuous that there must be at a minimum just as much [reality] in the cause as there is in the effect. And therefore it is to be conceded that, since I be a cogitating thing — and having in me some idea of God— , whatever kind of cause of me would, finally, , be assigned, it is also a cogitating thing, and that this cause has the idea of all the perfections that I attribute to God. And again, it can be asked of this cause whether it would be from itself, or from another cause. For if this cause would be from itself, it is obvious from the things that have been said that it itself is God, namely, because— since it would have the power of existing through itself—without doubt it also has the power of possessing actually all the perfections the ideas of which it has in itself, that is, all the perfections that I conceive to be in God. But if this cause would be from another, it will in the same manner again be asked of this other cause whether it would be from itself, or from another cause, until it would, finally, come down to the ultimate cause: which will be God.

[34.] For it is satisfactorily overt that no infinite regress can be given here, especially since I be here dealing not only with the cause that has once produced me, but also — maximally — with that cause which preserves me at the present time.

146 147

Nec fingi potest plures forte causas partiales ad me efficiendum concurrisse, & ab una ideam unius ex perfectionibus quas Deo tribuo, ab alia ideam alterius me accepisse, adeo ut omnes quidem illae perfectiones alicubi in universo reperiantur, sed non omnes simul junctae in uno aliquo, qui sit Deus. Nam conn* unitas, simplicitas, sive inseparabilitas eorum omnium quae in Deo sunt, una est ex praecipuis perfectionibus quas in eo esse intelligo. Nec certe istius omnium ejus perfectionum unitatis idea in me potuit poni ab ulli causi, a qua etiam aliarum perfectionum ideas non habuerim: neque enim efficere potuit ut illas simul junctas & inseparabiles intelligerem, nisi simul effecerit ut quaenam illae essent agnoscerem.

Quantum denique ad parentes attinet, ut omnia vera sint quae de illis unquam putavi, non tamen profecto illi me conservant, nec etiam ullo modo me, quatenus sum res cogitans, effecerunt; sed tantiim dispositiones quasdam in eā materia posuerunt, cui me, hoc est mentem, quam solam nunc pro me acci[51]pio, inesse judicavi. Ac proinde hic nulla de iis difficultas esse potest; sed omnino est concludendum, ex hoc solo quexl existam, quaedamque idea entis perfectissimi, hoc est Dei, in me sit, evidentissime demonstrari Deum etiam existere.

Superest tantiim ut examinem qui ratione ideam istam a Deo accepi; neque enim illam sensibus hausi, nec unquam non expectanti mihi advenit, ut solent rerum sensibilium ideae, cūm istae res externis sensuum organis occurrunt, vel occurrere videntur; nec etiam a me efficta est, nam nihil ab illā detrahere, nihil illi superaddere plane possum; ac proinde superest ut mihi sit innata, quemadmodum etiam mihi est innata idea mei ipsius. Et sane non mirum est Deum, me creando, ideam illam mihi indidisse, ut esset tanquam nota artificis operi suo impressa;

[35.] And it cannot be feigned that several partial causes have perhaps concurred to effect me, and that from one I have received the idea of one of the perfections that I attribute to God and from another the idea of another, so that all these perfections would surely be found somewhere in the universe, but not all joined together in some one being, who would be God. For — on the contrary— the unity, the simplicity, or the inseparability of all the things that are in God is one of the foremost perfections that I understand to be in him. And the idea of this unity of all his perfections certainly could not have been posited in me by any cause from which I had not also had the ideas of the other perfections. For it could not have effected that I would understand these perfections as joined together and inseparable unless it simultaneously had effected that I would recognize which perfections they would be.

[36.] Finally, as far as it pertains to my parents, even if all the things that I have ever thought about them would be true, they still do not in fact preserve me, and they have also not effected me, in so far as I am a cogitating thing, in any manner. Rather have they only posited certain dispositions in that matter in which I have judged that I, that is, a mind— which alone I now accept as me— , am. And therefore there can be no difficulty concerning them here. Rather is it completely to be concluded from thence alone that I were to exist, and that an idea of a most perfect being, that is, of God, were to be in me, that it is very evidently demonstrated that God also exists.

[37.] There remains only that I would examine how I have received this idea from God. For I have not derived it from the senses, and it has never come to me as one who is not expecting it, as the ideas of sensible things usually then do when these things occur —or seem to occur— to the external organs of the senses. Nor also has it been feigned by me, for plainly I can subtract nothing from it and add nothing to it. And therefore it remains that this idea would be innate in me, just as the idea of me myself is also innate in me.

[38.] And it is surely not surprising that in creating me God has given this idea into me in order that it might be like the

148 149

nec etiam opus est ut nota illa sit aliqua res ab opere ipso diversa. Sed ex hoc uno qubd Deus me creavit, valde credibile est me quodammodo ad imaginem & similitudinem ejus factum esse, illamque similitudinem, in qua Dei idea continetur, a me percipi per eandem facultatem, per quam ego ipse a me percipior: hoc est, dum in meipsum mentis aciem converto, non modo intelligo me esse rem incompletam & ab alio dependentem, remque ad majora & majora sive meliora indefinite aspirantem; sed simul etiam intelligo illum, a quo pendeo, majora ista omnia non indefinite & potentia tantilm, sed reipsa infinite in se habere, atque ita Deum esse. Tota que vis argumenti in eo est, quod agnoscam fieri non posse [52] ut existam talis naturae qualis sum, nempe ideam Dei in me habens, nisi revera Deus etiam existeret, Deus, inquam, ille idem cujus idea in me est, hoc est, habens omnes illas perfectiones, quas ego non comprehendere, sed quocunque modo attingere cogitatione possum, & nullis plane defectibus obnoxius. Ex quibus satis patet illum fallacem esse non posse; omnem enim fraudem & deceptionem a defectu aliquo pendere, lumine naturali manifestum est.

Sed priusquam hoc diligentius examinem, simulque in alias veritates quae inde colligi possunt inquiram, placet hic aliquandiu in ipsius Dei contemplatione immorari, ejus attributa apud me expendere, & immensi hujus luminis pulchritudinem, quantum caligantis ingenii mei acies ferre poterit, intueri, admirari, adorare. Ut enim in hac sola divinae majestatis contemplatione summam alterius vitae foelicitatem consistere fide credimus, ita etiam jam ex eAdem, licet multo minus perfect5, maximam, cujus in hac vitA capaces simus, voluptatem percipi posse experimur.

mark of an artificer impressed on his work. And there is also no need that that mark would be something different from the work itself. But from this one thing — that God has created me it is very credible that I have in some manner been made in his image and likeness, and that that likeness, in which the idea of God is contained, is perceived by me through the same faculty through which I myself am perceived by me: that is, when I turn the vision of the mind into myself, not only do I then understand that I am a thing incomplete and dependent on another, and a thing indefinitely aspiring to greater and greater, or better, things, but simultaneously I also understand that he on whom I depend has all these greater things in him not just indefinitely and potentially, but rather according to the thing itself infinitely, and thus that he is God. And the total force of the argument lies therein that I would recognize that it cannot happen that I would exist of such a nature of which I am, namely, having the idea of God in me, unless God did also really and truly exist: God, I say, he, the same one of whom the idea is in me, that is, having all those perfections which I cannot comprehend, but to which I can in some way attain by cogitation, and being subject to no defects at all. From which things it is obvious enough that God cannot be a deceiver. For it is manifest by the natural light that all fraud and deception depend on some defect.

[39.] But before I were to examine this more diligently and simultaneously were to inquire into the other truths that can be gathered therefrom , it is here fitting to pause for a while in the contemplation of God himself, to refiect within me on his attributes and to intuit, to admire and to adore the beauty of his immense light, so far as the vision of my darkened mind will be able to bear it. For just as we believe by faith that the highest felicity of the other life consists solely in this contemplation of the divine majesty, so also do we know by experience that the maximal pleasure of which we would be capable in this life can now be perceived from the same — it is granted — much less perfect contemplation.

END OF MEDITATION THREE